As I read through the daily digests from day-to-day, there seems to be a stream of questions regarding the camera's workings. I think it is agreed that the cameras of today are becoming (or have become) small hand held computers. To my mind, their complexity takes away from the true art of photography. Seems like we often spend more time fooling around with trying to figure out the workings of the camera then in taking the best photograph we can. Maybe I'm just a "good old days" kind of guy.
Your thoughts.
The Villages wrote:
As I read through the daily digests from day-to-day, there seems to be a stream of questions regarding the camera's workings. I think it is agreed that the cameras of today are becoming (or have become) small hand held computers. To my mind, their complexity takes away from the true art of photography. Seems like we often spend more time fooling around with trying to figure out the workings of the camera then in taking the best photograph we can. Maybe I'm just a "good old days" kind of guy.
Your thoughts.
As I read through the daily digests from day-to-da... (
show quote)
Technology is not a distraction from the art of photography. The opposite is true.
Gene51
Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
The Villages wrote:
As I read through the daily digests from day-to-day, there seems to be a stream of questions regarding the camera's workings. I think it is agreed that the cameras of today are becoming (or have become) small hand held computers. To my mind, their complexity takes away from the true art of photography. Seems like we often spend more time fooling around with trying to figure out the workings of the camera then in taking the best photograph we can. Maybe I'm just a "good old days" kind of guy.
Your thoughts.
As I read through the daily digests from day-to-da... (
show quote)
That is only temporary. Once the camera is learned, it can feel like an extension of yourself, and using it becomes a simple matter of pointing it at a subject and pressing the shutter.
I remember back in high school (mid-70s) photography class when a teacher came in and started complaining about how the recently introduced auto exposure feature of the then new cameras was going to ruin the creativity of photography. It didn’t.
Cameras today work the same as they did 40+ years ago: set the ISO (ASA back when), set the shutter speed and the aperture. You don’t need to use all the technology that modern cameras have. It’s up to you on how and what you use. Cameras can be as simple or as complicated as you want or need them to be. My $0.02.
The Villages wrote:
As I read through the daily digests from day-to-day, there seems to be a stream of questions regarding the camera's workings. I think it is agreed that the cameras of today are becoming (or have become) small hand held computers. To my mind, their complexity takes away from the true art of photography. Seems like we often spend more time fooling around with trying to figure out the workings of the camera then in taking the best photograph we can. Maybe I'm just a "good old days" kind of guy.
Your thoughts.
As I read through the daily digests from day-to-da... (
show quote)
I find that I regularly use only about 10% of the technology available on my camera because much of the technology is provided for kinds of photography that I don't generally do. But that 10% that I do use makes photography easier for me and I feel I get better results. And maybe I will need a different 10% some day so I don't resent it being there.
LWW
Loc: Banana Republic of America
twice_shooter wrote:
I remember back in high school (mid-70s) photography class when a teacher came in and started complaining about how the recently introduced auto exposure feature of the then new cameras was going to ruin the creativity of photography. It didn’t.
Cameras today work the same as they did 40+ years ago: set the ISO (ASA back when), set the shutter speed and the aperture. You don’t need to use all the technology that modern cameras have. It’s up to you on how and what you use. Cameras can be as simple or as complicated as you want or need them to be. My $0.02.
I remember back in high school (mid-70s) photograp... (
show quote)
Agreed.
However most folks who buy a new DSLR have never learned the basics of photography and end up fishing through menus searching for the ‘PERFECT PICTURE’ setting.
Things get muddled in any photography forum because the beauty of a photo is somehow diminished if it wasn’t taken in Manual mode. More than half the cost of my camera is for the amazing things the technology can produce but I am brainwashed into thinking I can do it better manually, i.e., I can outsmart the computer.
The Villages wrote:
As I read through the daily digests from day-to-day, there seems to be a stream of questions regarding the camera's workings. I think it is agreed that the cameras of today are becoming (or have become) small hand held computers. To my mind, their complexity takes away from the true art of photography. Seems like we often spend more time fooling around with trying to figure out the workings of the camera then in taking the best photograph we can. Maybe I'm just a "good old days" kind of guy.
Your thoughts.
As I read through the daily digests from day-to-da... (
show quote)
The true Art of Photography is the image, not the tools.
LWW
Loc: Banana Republic of America
joehel2 wrote:
Things get muddled in any photography forum because the beauty of a photo is somehow diminished if it wasn’t taken in Manual mode. More than half the cost of my camera is for the amazing things the technology can produce but I am brainwashed into thinking I can do it better manually, i.e., I can outsmart the computer.
I can easily outsmart the camera, all it can do is offer up many technically correct exposures ... it cannot nail the correct creative exposure without human direction.
Digital cameras offer more control over the photographic process. This control brings more options to the hands of the photographer. I suggest that if one finds learning the digital camera daunting, then attend a workshop or two to become familiar with camera operation.
Overall, the principles, concepts, rules, and techniques of film photography have carried forward into the digital era of photography. Learning photography, whether film or digital, does require attention to its ins-and-outs. Photography functions as a craft that one learns both by study and by doing.
I state the obvious.
The Villages wrote:
As I read through the daily digests from day-to-day, there seems to be a stream of questions regarding the camera's workings. I think it is agreed that the cameras of today are becoming (or have become) small hand held computers. To my mind, their complexity takes away from the true art of photography. Seems like we often spend more time fooling around with trying to figure out the workings of the camera then in taking the best photograph we can. Maybe I'm just a "good old days" kind of guy.
Your thoughts.
As I read through the daily digests from day-to-da... (
show quote)
The Villages wrote:
As I read through the daily digests from day-to-day, there seems to be a stream of questions regarding the camera's workings. I think it is agreed that the cameras of today are becoming (or have become) small hand held computers. To my mind, their complexity takes away from the true art of photography. Seems like we often spend more time fooling around with trying to figure out the workings of the camera then in taking the best photograph we can. Maybe I'm just a "good old days" kind of guy.
Your thoughts.
As I read through the daily digests from day-to-da... (
show quote)
Think back to the "Good Old Day's". You needed to learn the exposure triangle, lighting techniques, the in's and outs of developing pictures, the "creative capabilities of developing pictures", the "creative eye" to not waste film etc. You had your learning curve with film. Now you have the learning curve related to digital.
The good news is that most of what you learned with film is carried over to basic digital. Lighting techniques, and the exposure triangle haven't changed. It no longer costs a small fortune in time and money incase you miss the creative shot. Instead of the dark room, you have software.
No different IMHO.
Kmgw9v wrote:
Technology is not a distraction from the art of photography. The opposite is true.
Agreed.
It allows me to concentrate on other things more.
The abilities of the camera may seem overwhelming at the beginning.
Yes, that's what it would appear. Once I ran through the menus and tried every setting. Then, I put the camera in manual and it works the same as film cameras I use. All I concern myself with is ISO, aperture, and shutter speed.
--Bob
The Villages wrote:
As I read through the daily digests from day-to-day, there seems to be a stream of questions regarding the camera's workings. I think it is agreed that the cameras of today are becoming (or have become) small hand held computers. To my mind, their complexity takes away from the true art of photography. Seems like we often spend more time fooling around with trying to figure out the workings of the camera then in taking the best photograph we can. Maybe I'm just a "good old days" kind of guy.
Your thoughts.
As I read through the daily digests from day-to-da... (
show quote)
Except for them P&S or Smart Phone the typical high end camera isn't complex.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.